LEO OAL exemption

rico903 · Apr 8, 2016

Just curious to know if active LEOs are exempt from MD's min OAL length for their personal SBRs.

erwos · Apr 8, 2016

rico903 said:
Just curious to know if active LEOs are exempt from MD's min OAL length for their personal SBRs.

Only if you bought it on department letterhead, IIRC.

K31 · Apr 8, 2016

Why are LEOs exempt? What about Sagittarius's? Pisces?

Butcher · Apr 8, 2016

You would probably need commanders approval / department letterhead stating you're buying it for duty use. That's at the very least. I don't remember cops being exempt from OAL, though...just exempt from buying a non HBAR AR-15. I don't know any department that carries anything that small anyway.

Hawkeye · Apr 8, 2016

rico903 said:
Just curious to know if active LEOs are exempt from MD's min OAL length for their personal SBRs.

I'd have to go look to be sure, but I don't believe that there is any exemption built in to the law for this. Departmentally owned weapons are exempt, but personal ones are not.

Wayne1one · Apr 8, 2016

Hawkeye said:
I'd have to go look to be sure, but I don't believe that there is any exemption built in to the law for this. Departmentally owned weapons are exempt, but personal ones are not.

This, plus if it's under 29" seems hard to justify for duty use.

Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk

Hawkeye · Apr 8, 2016

Ok, I was wrong, kind of.

SB281, enrolled version.

Subtitle 3, section 4-302: (starts on page 11 of the linked pdf)

4–302.
This subtitle does not apply to:

(1) if acting within the scope of official business, personnel of the United States government or a unit of that government, members of the armed forces of the United States or of the National Guard, law enforcement personnel of the State or a local unit in the State, OR A RAILROAD POLICE OFFICER AUTHORIZED UNDER TITLE 3 OF THE
3 PUBLIC SAFETY ARTICLE OR 49 U.S.C. § 28101;

[removed non-applicable subsections]

(7) POSSESSION BY A PERSON WHO IS RETIRED IN GOOD STANDING FROM SERVICE WITH A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY OF THE STATE OR A LOCAL UNIT IN THE STATE AND IS NOT OTHERWISE PROHIBITED FROM RECEIVING AN ASSAULT WEAPON OR DETACHABLE MAGAZINE IF:

(I) THE ASSAULT WEAPON OR DETACHABLE MAGAZINE IS SOLD OR TRANSFERRED TO THE PERSON BY THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY ON RETIREMENT; OR

(II) THE ASSAULT WEAPON OR DETACHABLE MAGAZINE WAS PURCHASED OR OBTAINED BY THE PERSON FOR OFFICIAL USE WITH THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY BEFORE RETIREMENT;

So basically, the entirety of subtitle 3 of SB281 (which is the bit about assault weapons and detachable magazines) does not apply to retired LEOs who are not otherwise prohibited and who either have the assault weapon transferred to them by the department on retirement or who had a personally owned assault weapon that was originally purchased for use in the line of duty.

Subsection 1 up there is a little strange in the wording - it says that the subtitle does not apply to a LEO who is acting within the scope of official business. Realistically what this probably means is that a LEO would be allowed to purchase and possess an otherwise banned assault weapon for use in official duty.

Blaster229 · Apr 8, 2016

Don't confuse "assault weapon" with NFA OAL.

Hawkeye · Apr 8, 2016

Blaster229 said:
Don't confuse "assault weapon" with NFA OAL.

I am not, nor is this thread.

This thread is in reference to MSP's current stance that a post October 1 2013 SBR is not exempt from the definition of an Assault Weapon in FSA2013, and therefore must have an OAL of at least 29" to be legal.

LEOs, active and retired, are exempted from the section in FSA2013 about assault weapons under certain circumstances as I pointed out above, and therefore, under those certain circumstances, could have a post-October 1 SBR that was less than 29" in OAL.

Blaster229 · Apr 8, 2016

Hawkeye said:
I am not, nor is this thread.

This thread is in reference to MSP's current stance that a post October 1 2013 SBR is not exempt from the definition of an Assault Weapon in FSA2013, and therefore must have an OAL of at least 29" to be legal.

LEOs, active and retired, are exempted from the section in FSA2013 about assault weapons under certain circumstances as I pointed out above, and therefore, under those certain circumstances, could have a post-October 1 SBR that was less than 29" in OAL.

I have been a MD resident and a LEO for a long time now, admittedly not an expert on exemptions. However, doesn't a SBR still come under NFA anyway?
I cannot see how a cop, with letterhead stating for duty use, can simply build/purchase a SBR "for duty use" and then simply keep it for personal use in retirement without doing whatever NFA tax stamp for would be required from a non LEO.

Hawkeye · Apr 8, 2016

Blaster229 said:
I have been a MD resident and a LEO for a long time now, admittedly not an expert on exemptions. However, doesn't a SBR still come under NFA anyway?

It absolutely does.

I cannot see how a cop, with letterhead stating for duty use, can simply build/purchase a SBR "for duty use" and then simply keep it for personal use in retirement without doing whatever NFA tax stamp for would be required from a non LEO.

He / she can't.

The discussion was around whether or not, if he / she complied with all the other parts of the NFA, could a LEO have an SBR that was shorter than the Maryland-only 29" OAL limit that was imposed by the MSP's interpretation of FSA2013.

Basically, since LEOs are exempted from the "assault weapons" parts of FSA2013, they could, theoretically, have an SBR which is otherwise legally stamped and NFA compliant, that's shorter than 29" OAL.

Blaster229 · Apr 8, 2016

Hawkeye said:
It absolutely does.

He / she can't.

The discussion was around whether or not, if he / she complied with all the other parts of the NFA, could a LEO have an SBR that was shorter than the Maryland-only 29" OAL limit that was imposed by the MSP's interpretation of FSA2013.

Basically, since LEOs are exempted from the "assault weapons" parts of FSA2013, they could, theoretically, have an SBR which is otherwise legally stamped and NFA compliant, that's shorter than 29" OAL.

Herein lies my OAL ignorance. I had no idea that it mattered. I thought SBR was SBR regardless of how short.
Thanks for the education.

Hawkeye · Apr 8, 2016

Blaster229 said:
Herein lies my OAL ignorance. I had no idea that it mattered. I thought SBR was SBR regardless of how short.

It SHOULD be that way.

Unfortunately, as part of their "an SBR is both a handgun and a rifle, or either one depending on when we want it to be" stance, the MSP says that you can't have an SBR made after October 1 2013 with an OAL of less than 29" or it is banned as a "copycat" assault weapon.

Many of us believe this is an incorrect interpretation of the law, and Engage Armament has a lawsuit underway to overturn that interpretation, but for now it is what it is. MSP has instructed the ATF that they shouldn't approve any SBRs of less than 29" OAL or it's in violation of MD state law, so the ATF isn't approving them.

chesapeakeIRON · Apr 8, 2016

K31 said:
Why are LEOs exempt? What about Sagittarius's? Pisces?

Hahaha good one

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Butcher · Apr 10, 2016

any LEOs successfully register a SBR shorter than 29" since 10-1-13?

5.56blaster · Apr 10, 2016

Hawkeye said:
It SHOULD be that way.

Unfortunately, as part of their "an SBR is both a handgun and a rifle, or either one depending on when we want it to be" stance, the MSP says that you can't have an SBR made after October 1 2013 with an OAL of less than 29" or it is banned as a "copycat" assault weapon.

Many of us believe this is an incorrect interpretation of the law, and Engage Armament has a lawsuit underway to overturn that interpretation, but for now it is what it is. MSP has instructed the ATF that they shouldn't approve any SBRs of less than 29" OAL or it's in violation of MD state law, so the ATF isn't approving them.

I tried to buy an SBR built 10 years ago. Had paperwork showing the sale before 10/13 and it was help up so long (well over a year) that I stopped the transfer. BATFE was so confused at the time they didn't know what to do for folks in Md. OAL was 21" Maryland sucks! :mad54:

teratos · Apr 10, 2016

Hawkeye said:
I'd have to go look to be sure, but I don't believe that there is any exemption built in to the law for this. Departmentally owned weapons are exempt, but personal ones are not.

Right. The law does not imply personal ownership by LEO is OK. I think just the departmental firearms.

rico903 · Apr 14, 2016

teratos said:
Right. The law does not imply personal ownership by LEO is OK. I think just the departmental firearms.

This was my thought when I started the thread. It really sucks that we can't even build one on a pre 10/13 receiver as well.

LEO OAL exemption

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Ultimate Member

The Hebrew Hammer

"Part of that Ultra MAGA Crowd"

Active Member

The Leatherstocking

gun aficionado

The Leatherstocking

God loves you, I don't.

The Leatherstocking

God loves you, I don't.

The Leatherstocking

God loves you, I don't.

The Leatherstocking

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

My hair is amazing

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics